2012 Republican News

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by classicman

I don't understand why he isn't doing better. He really seems like the most rational of them all.

There's your problem.

[DanaC]

So, he is hampered, but part of the reason he is hampered is to do with his earlier strategies and approaches, and how he played the game early in his presidency?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by glatt

So they sound like wacko extremists. It will be amusing to watch them try to change their rhetoric in several months when they try to appeal to the middle. I can't see any of them pulling it off.

That's what happened with McCain. I liked McCain, until he started talking nonsense to appeal to the republican right-wing base.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

That's what happened with McCain. I liked McCain, until he started talking nonsense to appeal to the republican right-wing base.

Yeah. I kind of liked him until he did his run for president.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by classicman

I don't understand why he isn't doing better. He really seems like the most rational of them all.
Then again thats not saying much is it?

Him and Romney have similar actual views (I'm not talking about rhetoric) so most of Huntsman's would be supporters go to Romney.

[classicman]

Yes, but I think Huntsman has a lot less baggage in the religion category. He also has more experience with his ambassadorship and a few other things.

[tw]

Is there any reason to believe all combatants are in the ring yet?

[classicman]

no, got anyone in mind? I can't think of anyone on that side credible enough. IT seems as though they all are waiting to run against Biden or Clinton (whoever) in 2016.

[Undertoad]

Nate Silver at NYT graphs the race and finds the room for more candidates:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...-p-candidates/

[Griff]

Neat graphs. Is it possible that the nut cluster (yummy) will crush each others chances? It could be quite a circus at the convention. Romney looks strong in that case, but I'd rather see Guiliani or Huntsman. Rudy thinks women have rights, but surrounded by 911 responders he could still get the raw meat vote.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Nate Silver at NYT graphs the race and finds the room for more candidates:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...-p-candidates/

Interesting charts, I wonder how he scored each candidate to get them into their various bubbles and sizes.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Michele Bachmann

I don't know how much does God has to do to get the attention of the politicians? We've had and earthquake we've had a hurricane. He said "Are you going to start listening to Me here? Listen to the the American people."

Originally Posted by Michele Bachmann

My comments were not meant to be ones that were taken lightly. What I was saying in a humorous vein is that there are things that are happening that politicians need to pay attention to it. It isn't every day that we have an earthquake in the United States.

Statements like this make me worried and angry. Politicians who act this way are to be viewed skeptically. I try to make sense of this kind of behavior and every likely motive is bad or worse. Here's the range of motives as I see it:


They're clumsy. This is bad.

This happens, I know. It can range from funny to embarrassing to shameful. Bachmann's misstep about Elvis' birthday noted later in the clip is an example. Ha ha (note to self, get better researchers). Earlier in the year when she just made up some shit about American history regarding the American Revolution is closer to the shameful end of the scale.


They're pandering. This is worse.

This is very common, and it's understandable, do this for me, vote, and I'll do this for you, (insert promise here). When it's real, tangible, and good, it is legitimate. When it is fantasy, like this is, it's scary and wrong.


They're uninformed. This is worse still.

Bachmann's uninformed if she really thinks that there isn't an earthquake in the United States every day. News flash--earthquakes happen all the time. A discussion about the hand of God belongs elsewhere. Being well informed is a necessary but not sufficient condition to be a good leader. It is important for our leaders to have a good grasp of the facts. Being poorly informed is inexcusable and makes good leadership impossible.


They believe. This is the worst.

I don't know what's in Bachmann's heart. But this statement is consistent with other similar statements and consistent with some of her actions: belief that she knows what God wants. I have a BIG problem with this kind of conflation of personal belief and public responsibility. A cornerstone of our republic is the separation of church and state, and the prospect of our politicians, *especially* the leader of our country, doing God's work as revealed to them, revolts and terrifies me. Bachmann attempts to control the damage she wrought by dressing it up as merely "clumsy" "humor" (in fact she stumbles over her own explanation), but it's really this worst kind of behavior: belief, belief in the face of facts and logic. God save us.

I don't want my leaders to be clumsy, or pandering or uninformed or worst of all, true believers of false ideas. I deserve better and so do you. I demand better. And so should you.

[DanaC]

Fuck yeah!

Well said V.

[ZenGum]

If the USA weren't so dang important, this would be kind of funny. As it is, it is scary.

[Trilby]

why is the latest batch of political women such a joke?

Putting these women (Michele, Sarah and their ilk) up front and suggesting they are the best American women can hope for??? wtf?

where are the smart women?? where are the self-aware women? where are the women who at least passed basic biology???